Legal Opinion

Thurmond v. Hale

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 11, 1934No. 9940PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHutcheson, J.

An order passed by the judge as follows: “This ease was heard at the time and place fixed by order of the eourt, and decision reserved till this date. Any right the plaintiff has in the property will be protected under the doctrine of lis pendens. After considering the evidence, the restraining order heretofore granted is vacated,” is not an order refusing to grant an interlocutory injunction, and affords no basis for a writ of error. Shirley v. Standard Oil Co., 169 Ga. 300 (150 S. E. *746215); Forrester v. Denny, 169 Ga, 435 (150 S. E. 555); Touchton v. Henderson, 158 Ga. 819 (124 S. E.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Touchton v. HendersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
  2. Forrester v. DennySupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
  3. Shirley v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1929

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Jett v. GordonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API